ArticlePloS one2018
DNA microarray-based assessment of virulence potential of Shiga toxin gene-carrying Escherichia coli O104:H7 isolated from feedlot cattle feces.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recent Advancements in the Technologies Detecting Food Spoiling Agents.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2021Review
- Identification, Shiga toxin subtypes and prevalence of minor serogroups of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli in feedlot cattle feces.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Escherichia coli O104:H4, a hybrid pathotype reported in a large 2011 foodborne outbreak in Germany, has not been detected in cattle feces. However, cattle harbor and shed in the feces other O104 serotypes, particularly O104:H7, which has been associated with sporadic cases of diarrhea in humans. The objective of our study was to assess the virulence potential of Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) O104:H7 isolated from feces of feedlot cattle using DNA microarray. Six strains of STEC O104:H7 isolated from cattle feces were analyzed using FDA-E. coli Identification (ECID) DNA microarray to determine their virulence profiles and compare them to the human strains (clinical) of O104:H7, STEC O104:H4 (German outbreak strain), and O104:H21 (milk-associated Montana outbreak strain). Scatter plots were generated from the array data to visualize the gene-level differences between bovine and human O104 strains, and Pearson correlation coefficients (r) were determined. Splits tree was generated to analyze relatedness between the strains. All O104:H7 strains, both bovine and human, similar to O104:H4 and O104:H21 outbreak strains were negative for intimin (eae). The bovine strains were positive for Shiga toxin 1 subtype c (stx1c), enterohemolysin (ehxA), tellurite resistance gene (terD), IrgA homolog protein (iha), type 1 fimbriae (fimH), and negative for genes that code for effector proteins of type III secretory system. The six cattle O104 strains were closely related (r = 0.86-0.98) to each other, except for a few differences in phage related and non-annotated genes. One of the human clinical O104:H7 strains (2011C-3665) was more closely related to the bovine O104:H7 strains (r = 0.81-0.85) than the other four human clinical O104:H7 strains (r = 0.75-0.79). Montana outbreak strain (O104:H21) was more closely related to four of the human clinical O104:H7 strains than the bovine O104:H7 strains. None of the bovine E. coli O104 strains carried genes characteristic of E. coli O104:H4 German outbreak strain and unlike other human strains were also negative for Shiga toxin 2. Because cattle E. coli O104:H7 strains possess stx1c and genes that code for enterohemolysin and a variety of adhesins, the serotype has the potential to be a diarrheagenic foodborne pathogen in humans.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.